Re: extending <% | %>

Hans Dieter Pearcey wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:37:55PM -0800, BenRifkah Bergsten-Buret wrote:
>   
>> However, I'm not sold that using the pipe to chain escapes is really 
>> necessary.  I agree that the pipe symbol is great because it already 
>> carries the desired meaning because its used in numerous other 
>> contexts.  However, implementing it seems to me to be more trouble than 
>> its worth especially since the comma is already implemented (and used in 
>> the wild) for chaining escapes.
>>     
>
> The problem is not having multiple pipes -- the problem is extending the syntax
> of the pipe RHS.   As soon as you allow '| foo(<arbitrary perl>)', the pipe is
> a problem, without any chaining entering the picture.
Ah.  Now I see the dilemma.  I was stuck on vertical bars on the LHS of 
the pipe.  It's not a huge problem if you only have to account for pipes 
on the LHS, but if you allow arbitrary perl (including vertical bars) on 
the RHS then parsing can become a lot more difficult.

If you only have to account for '| foo(<arbitrary perl>)' then you might 
be able to get some help from Text::Balanced.  Allowing for '| 
foo(<arbitrary perl>) | bar(<arbitrary perl>)' would be more difficult 
but doable.  (Not that you implied it but if you have to allow '| 
<arbitrary perl>' I think you're going to be SOL.)

While I agree that it would be nice to allow for this arbitrary perl I 
think that tackling it iteratively would be a good idea.

-- Ben

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/